Great, another paid tool to cheat at coding interviews. I guess the future is coming back to on-site interviews only.
Fraud seems like something to be proud of anymore.
Have you seen who's in charge?
Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
81–90 of 126 posts
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#82If the problems are tailored to the role and the job requirements can be completed using AI, isn’t this sort of the correct outcome? If you have job requirements that extend beyond “trivially completable with AI” ask questions that aren’t trivially completable with AI.
The role invariably involves things the candidates don't know coming in. Otherwise we'd be filtering candidates based on familiarity with specific technologies, which is bad for everyone. That's the purpose of these algorithmic questions; they are a generic test of competency.
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#83Good. This destroys a system that is already broken and renders Leetcode and others useless for evaluating candidates in the AI era. The most ironic thing is that this qualifies for "hacking a system to your advantage" for Y Combinator. Those that are upset by Interview Coder as 'cheating' are themselves bounded by an outdated system waiting to be disrupted and Interview Coder is the result of that. The only way to s…
Some people here seem to believe this will make leetcode obsolete. I'm afraid it will just make cheatting a status quo - if everyone else aces the coding part of the interview because of some AI tool, then you are at a severe disadvantage if you try to play by the rules. From the perspective of the hiring manager it'll look like the coding questions are too easy, since everyone gets them right, except that one experi…
Hiring managers quickly realize that the cheaters don't actually know anything themselves, so the question is how they can combat cheating.
What will happen is that they will look for cheatproof solutions, such as testing on site, and filtering by credentials. Is that really what candidates want?
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#84Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great for whom? Travel agents?
people who value quality code bases and quality candidates
And since the cost of hiring goes up, they'll just be more stringent about whom they invite in the first place. I hope you've worked at a few FAANGs before applying!
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
leetcode is a bastard. I fucking hate it with a passion. Its almost useless as a way to learn how to be a better coder, as most of the "fastest" answers are unreadable. But if you are using it as a basis for interviews, you are more likely to bump into someone who has trained on that particular question. I'm not sure what the answer is, as other said, pair programming is kinda the answer. Maybe debugging something in…
I guess my experience with different, because I never had to grind leetcode. I had some basic algorithmic lesson at my University (and a short adventure with competitive coding) but that's all. I never had a technical interviews where that was a problem - either there was no typical coding question, or a simple sanity check exercise. Instead we discussed some problems and thinks related to the job. I understand my ex…
I think because google et al started doing coding tests like this, everyone else does.
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#86So, am I missing something? Is this just a tool allowing job candidates to commit fraud? I'm no lawyer, so I'm not sure this would rise to the level of actual legal fraud, but moral fraud at the very least is what I think I'm seeing. EDIT: Now I see it at the bottom of the page... "Interview Coder is a desktop app designed to help job seekers ace technical interviews by providing real-time assistance with coding ques…
You're not wrong, but you're overlooking the cultural normalcy. When you have something to sell, you're allowed to lie until you're blue in the face and nobody even blinks. But when applicants merely demonstrate how well they understood and internalized that state of affairs, it's fraud. None of this is OK in my book but it's hypocritical to single out job applicants when the whole culture is like that.
I'm responding to a post on Hacker News, not writing the complete history of morality and culture.
I agree that lying and fraud by businesses, employees, buyers, and sellers are all reprehensible. Nonetheless, I would contend there's no problem discussing the actual subject at hand without expanding it.
I'm not being hypocritical, I'm simply being topical.
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#87So, am I missing something? Is this just a tool allowing job candidates to commit fraud? I'm no lawyer, so I'm not sure this would rise to the level of actual legal fraud, but moral fraud at the very least is what I think I'm seeing. EDIT: Now I see it at the bottom of the page... "Interview Coder is a desktop app designed to help job seekers ace technical interviews by providing real-time assistance with coding ques…
Is it fraud when they tell you you’ll spend most of your time coding cool new products but then you mostly do customer support and meetings?
[deleted]
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
I like leetcode easys for job interviews because it shows you know how to actually code. Many applicants cant even do fizz buzz.
And now they can do fizz buzz with AI, Cursor, Copilot, etc. If you want to filter out these candidates, bounties are the way here and in person interviews. Leetcode can't help you here.
Maybe an easy leetcode with a twist, also if you throw some LLM confusing text on the description I guarantee nobody will take it out before giving it to the LLM
But yeah last time anyone proposed me to do fizzbuzz I had to be very polite and tell them not to take a hike
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#89So at our company, we stopped asking algorithm questions in interviews.
Instead, our process starts with a one-hour technical conversation. We talk through the candidate's experience, how they think about systems and products, and dig into technical topics relevant to our stack (Ruby on Rails). This includes things like API design, ActiveRecord, SQL, caching, and security.
If that goes well, the next step is a collaborative pull request review. We have a test project with a few PRs, and we walk through one with the candidate. We give them context on the project, then ask for their feedback. We're looking for how they communicate, whether they spot design issues (like overly long parameter lists or complex functions), and how they reason about potential bugs.
This has worked really well for us. We've built a strong, pragmatic engineering team. Unfortunately though, none of us now remember how to invert a binary tree without Googling it..
Re: Interview Coder is an invisible AI for technical interviews
#90I've spent the last decade watching this arms race between interviewers and candidates. Last month I hired a senior dev who couldn't implement a basic database migration when we brought him on but aced our interview problems. Turned out he'd been using tools like this. The problem isn't the tools - they're inevitable. The problem is that our industry clings to this bizarre ritual where we test for skills that are com…
When did you switch to pair programming? Your post starts by stating you just hired the unqualified dev last month, so did this unqualified dev slip through your pair programming system? And if they did, doesn’t that undermine your view that the pair programming approach has dramatically improved your good hire hit rate (or, if pair programming is newly instituted in response to the unqualified dev hire, how can you…
It’s not necessarily undermined. Presuming the timeline is accurate: large orgs are hiring constantly and, if the person who commented is high enough in the org chart on whatever they consider to be their team, they may see a large number of hires.